I can't handle the elevation property.

Hello,

For a special reason, I would like to draw a site plan in a 3D DGN instead of a 2D DGN, to be able to use the "elevation" element property.
Normally we would draw this type of drawing in 2D, but in this case, I want to build this plan up in different "layers".
That means, each floor on a different elevation (Z-axis height).
I was very pleased when I discovered the elevation property.... and thought that would be a great help to make my work easier.
Unfortunately, however, I can't handle this elevation property.

It starts with the fact that there are differences between the V8iSS4 and the Connect Edition Update14, which I both use.
In the V8iSS4, the elevation is displayed for certain objects in the property window, but the elevation values ​​cannot be changed.

The other way, in the Connect Edition, I can change the elevation values ​​with the "Set Element Elevation" tool, but I don't know how to display this value for elements ....
In the Connect Edition, the point for the element elevation is missing...., this property can not be shown.

I'm very confused about the elevation property and would be happy if you could help.

1) Why does (in MSV8iSS4) the elevation property not exist for all type of elements?
For example, if I draw a shape, the "elevation" property is shown in the property windows. But if I draw a simple line, it didn´t have.

2) Why can I no longer see the elevation values ​​in the property window in the Connect Edition?
How can I display these values?

One optional question :)
3) Is it possible to select elements at a specific elevation?

I add 4 screen shots, with the difference between MSV8iSS4 and Connect Edition Update 14.

Many Thanks
Regards
Raphael

Parents Reply Children
  • Hi Jan,

    Thanks for your post.

    I think it's not so easy to say ...

    Of course, this may be a bit misleading for some peoples, but if you deal a little more with this function and, above all, recognize the benefits of this function, then I think it's justified.
    Otherwise such tools as the ModZ-Macro or the integretat function "set element elevation" would not have been developed .... :)
    I'm a bit confused in your statement, where you wrote:.

    Personally I do not like Elevation attribute, because ....
    From this perspective, standard Move and Set Element Elevation tools are better choice.

    You wrote that the set elevation tool is the better choice ...., but that's exactly my point and the "set elevation tool" sets exactly these values, which are displayed in the property window as elevation attribute ...!?

    Regards
    Raphael

  • but that's exactly my point and the "set elevation tool" sets exactly these values, which are displayed in the property window as elevation attribute ...!?

    No: Elevation value, displayed in Properties dialog, and Set Element Elevation tool, do different things, with potentially the same results in specific situations.

    The difference can be illustrated using general 3D not planar line (no parallel with any axis or plane, not defining any plane):

    • [Tested in V8i] Setting Elevation value to .e.g. 5 moves the whole line to some position (so it's similar to Move tool), but the distance is not 5 and the Elevation is set to different value than entered 5.
    • [Tested in CE] Using Set Element Elevation tool with the value 5, it sets Z values of all line vertices to 5. So in fact, it projects the element to Z plane, defined by entered value (the element is flattened).

    The situation when results are the same is when the line is parallel with Z plane, because Elevation moves the line to the defined height (Z plane), and Set Element Elevation move the line in the same way.

    With regards,

      Jan

  • Jan, yes you are right.

    That falls under the point I wrote in my opening post, that there are differences between MSV8I and MSconnect regarding the elevation function.

    I am still convinced of the elevation function and think that it could be helpful for certain work, but Bentley would have to change something, so that it really makes sense and is manageable in practice.
    One approach could be, for example, that we could choose between 2 options, when working with the "Set Element Elevation" tool.
    1) set elevation with "flatten"
    2) set elevation with "maintain offsets"

    So we could specifically choose what we want to realize, either push everything down to a Z value or move elements with their origin point to a fixed Z coordinate.

    Does it make sense to report this change request / bug to Bentley?
    What would be the best way to report?

    Thanks
    Regards
    Raphael

  • Does it make sense to report this change request / bug to Bentley?

    You must decide whether it's a bug.  If this is a bug, then submit a Service Request (SR) to Bentley Systems.  They will eventually decide whether they consider this a 'defect' or Works as Designed (WAD).

    What would be the best way to report?

    The best way to report a bug is through a formal SR to Bentley Systems. 

     
    Regards, Jon Summers
    LA Solutions

  • Service Request is done.
    I am curious and hope that this function will be improved.

    Thanks
    Regards